Dominiek Coates, Danielle Coppleson, Virginia Schmied
{"title":"Integrated physical and mental healthcare: an overview of models and their evaluation findings.","authors":"Dominiek Coates, Danielle Coppleson, Virginia Schmied","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Comorbid physical and mental health problems are common across the age spectrum. However, services addressing these health concerns are typically siloed and disconnected. Over the past 2 decades efforts have been made to design integrated services to address the physical and mental health needs of the population but little is known about the characteristics of effective integrated care models. The aim of the review was to map the design of integrated care initiatives/models and to describe how the models were evaluated and their evaluation findings.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Using a scoping review methodology, quantitative and qualitative evidence was systematically considered. To identify studies, Medline, PubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL were searched for the period from 2003 to 2018, and reference lists of included studies and review articles were examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The current review identified 43 studies, describing 37 models of integrated physical and mental healthcare. Although modest in terms of evaluation design, it is evident that models are well received by consumers and providers, increase service access, and improve physical and mental health outcomes. Key characteristics of models include shared information technology, financial integration, a single-entry point, colocated care, multidisciplinary teams, multidisciplinary meetings, care coordination, joint treatment plan, joint treatment, joint assessment/joint assessment document, agreed referral criteria and person-centred care. Although mostly modest in term of research design, models were well received by consumers and providers, increased service access and improved physical and mental health outcomes. There was no clear evidence regarding whether models of integrated care are cost neutral, increase or reduce costs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Future research is needed to identify the elements of integrated care that are associated with outcomes, measure cost implications and identify the experiences and priorities of consumers and clinicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":55996,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare","volume":"18 1","pages":"38-57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000215","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000215","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
Background: Comorbid physical and mental health problems are common across the age spectrum. However, services addressing these health concerns are typically siloed and disconnected. Over the past 2 decades efforts have been made to design integrated services to address the physical and mental health needs of the population but little is known about the characteristics of effective integrated care models. The aim of the review was to map the design of integrated care initiatives/models and to describe how the models were evaluated and their evaluation findings.
Method: Using a scoping review methodology, quantitative and qualitative evidence was systematically considered. To identify studies, Medline, PubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL were searched for the period from 2003 to 2018, and reference lists of included studies and review articles were examined.
Results: The current review identified 43 studies, describing 37 models of integrated physical and mental healthcare. Although modest in terms of evaluation design, it is evident that models are well received by consumers and providers, increase service access, and improve physical and mental health outcomes. Key characteristics of models include shared information technology, financial integration, a single-entry point, colocated care, multidisciplinary teams, multidisciplinary meetings, care coordination, joint treatment plan, joint treatment, joint assessment/joint assessment document, agreed referral criteria and person-centred care. Although mostly modest in term of research design, models were well received by consumers and providers, increased service access and improved physical and mental health outcomes. There was no clear evidence regarding whether models of integrated care are cost neutral, increase or reduce costs.
Conclusion: Future research is needed to identify the elements of integrated care that are associated with outcomes, measure cost implications and identify the experiences and priorities of consumers and clinicians.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare is the official journal of the Joanna Briggs Institute. It is a fully refereed journal that publishes manuscripts relating to evidence-based medicine and evidence-based practice. It publishes papers containing reliable evidence to assist health professionals in their evaluation and decision-making, and to inform health professionals, students and researchers of outcomes, debates and developments in evidence-based medicine and healthcare.
The journal provides a unique home for publication of systematic reviews (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, economic, scoping and prevalence) and implementation projects including the synthesis, transfer and utilisation of evidence in clinical practice. Original scholarly work relating to the synthesis (translation science), transfer (distribution) and utilization (implementation science and evaluation) of evidence to inform multidisciplinary healthcare practice is considered for publication. The journal also publishes original scholarly commentary pieces relating to the generation and synthesis of evidence for practice and quality improvement, the use and evaluation of evidence in practice, and the process of conducting systematic reviews (methodology) which covers quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, economic, scoping and prevalence methods. In addition, the journal’s content includes implementation projects including the transfer and utilisation of evidence in clinical practice as well as providing a forum for the debate of issues surrounding evidence-based healthcare.